It's more about the execution of the idea...

That. To my knowledge, there has never been a instance of a publisher literally buying an idea written down in a document from someone and nothing else, even if they had a proven track record. There are design directors, who are always ex-programmers, like shigeru miyamoto and cliff blesinski, but they still do a lot more that just kick back in a chair and come up with ideas.

Generally the best ideas are also coupled with an great idea for the implementation. John Carmack had an idea for a competitive multiplayer fps, but he also had an idea as a programmer of how to implement it so it was smooth and responsive regardless of latency, and it pretty much changed the industry (client side prediction - quakeworld).

 

*raise hand*
Edit: For three times, to be more precise.

 

Right, and I'm John Carmack.

See? Anyone can make stuff up on the Internet

 

1: http://www.simuwelt.de/game/sportangeln-2012-suedeuropa
2: http://www.simuwelt.de/game/untertagebau-simulator-2011
3: http://www.simuwelt.de/game/garten-simulator-2010-73

WIP:
http://www.indiegamedeveloper.org/?page_id=97

Edit: See, exceptions prove the rule.

 

Yep, those sure are some games. Where's the part that proves that someone cut you a check for writing "Garden Simulator" on a napkin?

 

I think you have to believe me in this case. Why should I lie when it comes to this?
All I want to say is, that it´s not the holy grail to sell a concept, based on an initial idea.

The thing is, that the idea opens the door.

 

http://www.indiegamedeveloper.org/?page_id=90

It says you were contracted to design, program and produce. So in which place are you lying? Did you sell them a GDD, or did you write code? Sounds like they contracted you to make a game. They didn't just buy an idea and nothing more.

Regardless of "what you wanted to say", my original statement was pretty clear, and you claimed otherwise: "there has never been a instance of a publisher literally buying an idea written down in a document from someone and nothing else."

 

Sure, in the long way they contracted me to make a game. Let me quote myself:

I apologize for misinterpreting "nothing else" (I´m not that good when it comes to english).
We are in line when it comes to your original statement.

Though, my opinion stands: Without the idea, there will be no execution. They depend on each other, and they are both valuable.

 

Have you been hired for the duration of the projects? Because if so you would not just be "selling the document and nothing else."

If you have, then you would be the first game designer I hear about that does not get to ride the full development cycle (not saying it's impossible, just the first one I hear off.)

 

To be fair, in these forums, thats a question with a lot of references to justify why anyone would think some one would lie about this stuff.

I give you the benefit of the doubt, though.

 

The concepts itself are defined as payed milestones, so you *could* say that I´ve selled them. But I see, this is nitpicking.
As I´ve written before, I´m on your side when it comes to just selling an idea / concept.

 

Here is the thing, as far as this thread goes: the deal is many think you can come up with an idea, be paid for it and sit back while everyone else works for you and you enjoy the credit and glory.

The point of the thread is that you don't get to do that. You must execute the idea properly and you get job based on that execution.

I just looked at your links, and hope you don't take this negatively, but based on what I saw there, I don't think they are calling you based off your ideas. I think they keep calling you because they know you can execute a sim game that meets their standards of quality.

It sounds to me they keep hiring you because of your capability to execute certain type of games, giving them the results they want, the profits they require, and a quality product that is worthy of their brand.

Edit for emphasis: Again not insulting your capability to come up with ideas, on the other hand, praising your ability to put a project together.

 

Refering to the original question, I believe the idea and the execution can´t have a value without each other.
They depend on each other and they are coequal. They share their value.

Edit: Actually I see your post more as a compliment, not as an insult. No need to worry.

 

Ideas are a simple matter, they aren't worth a penny. Everyone has ideas, they're easy [ Sir McAwesomes Petroz great point ].

The common misconception is that ideas and game design are the same thing. Well they're not. Game design is a complex matter, that generates it's "ideas" based on psychological studies, experience ( a long history of failures ) a extensive research.

The most "ideas" I've seen around here are based on pure experience over already completed game designs ( Hey I've played 10 MMOs, than I can make one! ). I myself have started with similar reasoning, even though not that cocky and with a bit more thought than that

Anyway now with that clear I can talk about game designs specifically.

Game designs are worthless, too ( sadly ). A game design by itself could rarely be of any value. A design document may be of some value but there is no guarantee that a publisher won't ruin the design or even steal some ideas and bin it.

For a game design to shine, you'll need some implementation. Even than it's not guaranteed that some big ass company won't rip the idea and create a clone with some ridiculous marketing strategy behind, but that's the risks of low budget developers.

And on the bright side - a good design, with no matter how shiny the implementation is may turn out great. Check out minecraft, no awesome graphics, actually not even decent graphics but an awesome design of the game ( I dunno if it was accidental or by design, I wonder though ) and it turned out to be a big hit ( just the amount of clones people are developing is amazing ).

 

Now that, I think I can agree with

 

Because I have a spreadsheet that generates hundreds of great ideas a second. I don't have a spreadsheet that can generate even a single executed idea. At all.

Watch this...

Wouldn't it be great if we had Faster Than Light Travel and could teleport wherever we wanted using a device that was built into our phones?

There's a great damn idea for you. That was easy. How about the execution? That's a little more tricky.

 

Generally speaking, publishers don't buy solely into concepts, they're buying at least as much into a developer's ability to execute that concept (and it sounds like that's the case with fogman, too). There are cases where a business is bought/merged/whatever solely to get at intellectual property (which is arguably the legal form of concepts and ideas), but I don't know of a single case where that's happened for an IP which hasn't already had a significant amount of execution.

In fact, it's only ever prior execution which has gives an IP any value. As an example, the Call of Duty and Need for Speed franchises aren't valuable because the ideas of "FPS where you're a part of a larger unit instead of one man against the world" and "racing game where you drive sports cars illegally and cops chase you" amount to much in and of themselves. After all, many games since (and possibly a few before) had exactly the same ideas and didn't turn out so well. Why did those games turn into many-multi-million dollar franchises where other games with the same ideas floundered and died? Execution.

 

Is it?

Patents, Copyright, Trademarks etc. all protect implementation's of an idea, not the idea itself.

 

While I think that's how it should be, could I not patent the idea of an implementation of an idea (without having actually implemented it yet myself)? I swear I see people doing that bullshit all the time, and I feel like that's where patent law gets really bonkers.

 

Only way to patent an idea without implementing is to write an extensive blueprint on how that implementation works.

Patent law gets bonkers in that disputing the implementation details tend to require a court procedure where you have to bicker back and forth with lawyers to convince a group of non-technical people (jury) that your implementation is entirely different from the patented claims.

 

Patents are issued for a method of execution of an actual idea. At least, in the States.

Nobody holds a patent on 'using your finger to unlock a phone' but Apple and Google both have patents on specific implementations of using your finger to unlock a phone.

 

^^ Exactly. Once you are documenting the very specific and technical implementation of the idea, you are no longer merely 'patenting an idea'.

Fwiw, from Wikipedia [a source that is not neccessarily authoritative, but often a sufficiently accurate summary of information with (most importantly) cited sources]

Patent - In modern usage, the term patent usually refers to the right granted to anyone who invents any new, useful, and non-obvious process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter.

Copyright - [gives] the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time. Generally...gives the copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine who may adapt the work to other forms, who may perform the work, who may financially benefit from it, and other related rights.... Most jurisdictions recognize copyright limitations, allowing "fair" exceptions to the creator's exclusivity of copyright, and giving users certain rights.

Trademark - is a distinctive sign or indicator used by an individual, business organization, or other legal entity to identify that the products or services to consumers with which the trademark appears originate from a unique source, and to distinguish its products or services from those of other entities.... A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements.

Servicemark - is a trademark used in some countries, notably the United States, to identify a service rather than a product.

 

No, all you could to is patent a method of implementing idea implementation. In theory. *NOT A LAWYER*

 

If this were truth, there'd be less Reality shows! A copyright is the protection of a specific realization of an idea. A trademark is a protection of a branding representation. A patent protects a process.

Gigi

 

Code (csharp):

1. //Let's put this into more logical terms via java script;
2.  
3. var ideaValue = 0; //How good the idea is.
4. var productionEffort = 0; //How effectively and continuously the project is worked on
5. var executionDifficulty = 0; //All challenges and cost of developing the project.
6. var resultQuality = 0; //Higher value means a better quality project
7.  
8. function Update () {
9.  
10. if (productionEffort < executionDifficulty) {resultQuality = 0; return;} //The project wasn't finished
11.  
12. if (ideaValue > 0  productionEffort >= executionDifficulty )
13.      {resultQuality = productionEffort;}
14. else
15. //idea value is 0 or negative, adding it may reduce result quality.
16. {resultQuality = ((productionEffort+ideaValue);}
17. }

My view is that the idea only has a significant effect if it is bad. Having a bad idea can hurt a project but a good idea won't compensate for bad execution.

 

Correct, but that's not quite the context I was trying to convey. Someone couldn't make Call of Duty 12 without acquiring the license to the IP, and that's the kind of thing I was talking about there. Point being, nobody is going to buy my company because I had a cool idea to make a game "where you're one dude fighting in a war as a part of a bigger unit", even though it's exactly the same idea that's behind a many-multi-million dollar franchise.

 

To answer the original question, execution is more important because there is a virtually infinite number of ideas out there. Everybody has ideas and ideas are more often than not based off another idea. What's much less common and harder to find than ideas are those (relatively) few people who actually can bring the ideas to fruition. It's all a matter if at the end of the day you still have just an idea or if you have made that idea a reality.